In scientific research, collaboration is one of the most effective ways to take advantage of new ideas, skills, resources, and for performing interdisciplinary research. Although collaboration networks have been intensively studied, the question of how individual scientists choose collaborators to study a new research topic remains almost unexplored. Here, we investigate the statistics and mechanisms of collaborations of individual scientists along their careers, revealing that, in general, collaborators are involved in significantly fewer topics than expected from controlled surrogate. In particular, we find that highly productive scientists tend to have higher fraction of single-topic collaborators, while highly cited, i.e., impactful, scientists have higher fraction of multi-topic collaborators. We also suggest a plausible mechanism for this distinction. Moreover, we investigate the cases where scientists involve existing collaborators into a new topic. We find that compared to productive scientists, impactful scientists show strong preference of collaboration with high impact scientists on a new topic. Finally, we validate our findings by investigating active scientists in different years and across different disciplines.
翻译:在科学研究中,合作是利用新思想、技能、资源和进行跨学科研究的最有效途径之一。尽管合作网络已经进行了深入的研究,但科学家个人如何选择合作者研究新的研究课题的问题仍然几乎没有探讨。在这里,我们调查科学家个人在其职业生涯中合作的统计和机制,揭示合作者参与的课题一般比受控替代者预期的要少得多。特别是,我们发现,高生产力科学家的单一主题合作者比例往往较高,而高水平的科学家有影响力的多主题合作者比例较高。我们还建议为这一区别建立一个可行的机制。此外,我们调查科学家将现有合作者纳入新课题的案例。我们发现,与有生产力的科学家相比,有影响力的科学家在一个新课题上表现出强烈的倾向,与具有高度影响力的科学家合作。最后,我们通过在不同年份和不同学科中积极调查科学家来验证我们的调查结果。